These maps are published by ECDC every Thursday in support of the Council Recommendation on a coordinated approach to the restriction of free movement in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which was adopted by EU Member States on 13 October 2020 and amended on 28 January 2021 and 14 June 2021. The maps are based on data reported by EU Member States to The European Surveillance System (TESSy) database by 23:59 every Tuesday.

Areas are marked in the following colours (note that as of 17 June 2021, regions are classified according to the criteria in the latest amendment of the Council Recommendation):

Green: if the 14-day notification rate is less than 50 and the test positivity rate is less than 4%; or if the 14-day notification rate is less than 75 and the test positivity rate less than 1% Orange: if the 14-day notification rate is less than 50 and the test positivity rate is 4% or more; or the 14-day notification rate is 50 or more and less than 75 and the test positivity rate is 1% or more; or the 14-day notification rate is between 75 and 200 and the test positivity rate is less than 4% Red: if the 14-day cumulative COVID-19 case notification rate ranges from 75 to 200 and the test positivity rate of tests for COVID-19 infection is 4% or more, or if the 14-day cumulative COVID-19 case notification rate is more than 200 but less than 500 Dark red: if the 14-day cumulative COVID-19 case notification rate is 500 or more Grey: if there is insufficient information or if the testing rate is lower than 300 cases per 100 000.

This dataset contains model-based place (incorporated and census designated places) estimates in GIS-friendly format. PLACES covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia —at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area levels. It provides information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at four geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates are Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2022 or 2021 data, Census Bureau 2020 population estimates, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022 estimates. The 2024 release uses 2022 BRFSS data for 36 measures and 2021 BRFSS data for 4 measures (high blood pressure, high cholesterol, cholesterol screening, and taking medicine for high blood pressure control among those with high blood pressure) that the survey collects data on every other year. These data can be joined with the 2020 Census place boundary file in a GIS system to produce maps for 40 measures at the place level. An ArcGIS Online feature service is also available for users to make maps online or to add data to desktop GIS software. https://cdcarcgis.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=3b7221d4e47740cab9235b839fa55cd7

This map features new data from the US CDC, mapping Behavioral Risk Factors Data and Trends at the Census Tract level.For more info, see the CDC webpage on Chronic Disease and Health Promotion Data & Indicators: https://chronicdata.cdc.gov/health-area/behavioral-risk-factors.NMCDC has built the feature service that runs this map and made it available for sharing on your own AGOL map. It contains 27 adult behavioral risk factors for 206 census tracts in NM's four major cities (Albuquerque, Rio Rancho, Santa Fe and Las Cruces). Responses can be explored for two time periods (2014 and 2017), and trends over time are also dislayed.Feature service information at - https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=2a261f56deb5452982233de0f87a6dd2#overview"The purpose of the 500 Cities Project is to provide city- and census tract-level small area estimates for chronic disease risk factors, health outcomes, and clinical preventive service use for the largest 500 cities in the United States. These small area estimates will allow cities and local health departments to better understand the burden and geographic distribution of health-related variables in their jurisdictions, and assist them in planning public health interventions. Learn more about the 500 Cities Project(https://www.cdc.gov/500cities/about.htm)."

This public use dataset has 11 data elements reflecting COVID-19 community levels for all available counties. This dataset contains the same values used to display information available at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/community-levels-county-map.html. CDC looks at the combination of three metrics — new COVID-19 admissions per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients, and total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days — to determine the COVID-19 community level. The COVID-19 community level is determined by the higher of the new admissions and inpatient beds metrics, based on the current level of new cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. New COVID-19 admissions and the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied represent the current potential for strain on the health system. Data on new cases acts as an early warning indicator of potential increases in health system strain in the event of a COVID-19 surge. Using these data, the COVID-19 community level is classified as low, medium , or high. COVID-19 Community Levels can help communities and individuals make decisions based on their local context and their unique needs. Community vaccination coverage and other local information, like early alerts from surveillance, such as through wastewater or the number of emergency department visits for COVID-19, when available, can also inform decision making for health officials and individuals. See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/community-levels.html for more information. Visit CDC’s COVID Data Tracker County View* to learn more about the individual metrics used for CDC’s COVID-19 community level in your county. Please note that county-level data are not available for territories. Go to https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#county-view.

This lookup application web tool will help public users identify their Community Development Corporation (CDC) and the associated service areas the City of Cleveland.InstructionsIn some instances, there are overlapping service areas between competing CDCs. Community development has layered the primary CDC first, and the secondary CDCs beneath it. To view the complete boundary of any CDC, you can click the CDC on the map, and it will highlight the complete boundary.To search a second address, you must click the "clear search location" button or use the "x" in the results area to start a new lookup.Update FrequencyUpdates are made as CDC boundaries are changed.This application uses the following dataset(s):Community Development Corporations (Funded)ContactsFor questions about the CDC's service area and operations, please reach out to your local CDC.For the application: City of Cleveland, Community Development

The interactive maps are visual representations of the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). Data were extracted from the US Census and the American Community Survey.

On March 10, 2023, the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center ceased its collecting and reporting of global COVID-19 data. For updated cases, deaths, and vaccine data please visit: World Health Organization (WHO)For more information, visit the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.COVID-19 Trends MethodologyOur goal is to analyze and present daily updates in the form of recent trends within countries, states, or counties during the COVID-19 global pandemic. The data we are analyzing is taken directly from the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases Dashboard, though we expect to be one day behind the dashboard’s live feeds to allow for quality assurance of the data.DOI: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.125529863/7/2022 - Adjusted the rate of active cases calculation in the U.S. to reflect the rates of serious and severe cases due nearly completely dominant Omicron variant.6/24/2020 - Expanded Case Rates discussion to include fix on 6/23 for calculating active cases.6/22/2020 - Added Executive Summary and Subsequent Outbreaks sectionsRevisions on 6/10/2020 based on updated CDC reporting. This affects the estimate of active cases by revising the average duration of cases with hospital stays downward from 30 days to 25 days. The result shifted 76 U.S. counties out of Epidemic to Spreading trend and no change for national level trends.Methodology update on 6/2/2020: This sets the length of the tail of new cases to 6 to a maximum of 14 days, rather than 21 days as determined by the last 1/3 of cases. This was done to align trends and criteria for them with U.S. CDC guidance. The impact is areas transition into Controlled trend sooner for not bearing the burden of new case 15-21 days earlier.Correction on 6/1/2020Discussion of our assertion of an abundance of caution in assigning trends in rural counties added 5/7/2020. Revisions added on 4/30/2020 are highlighted.Revisions added on 4/23/2020 are highlighted.Executive SummaryCOVID-19 Trends is a methodology for characterizing the current trend for places during the COVID-19 global pandemic. Each day we assign one of five trends: Emergent, Spreading, Epidemic, Controlled, or End Stage to geographic areas to geographic areas based on the number of new cases, the number of active cases, the total population, and an algorithm (described below) that contextualize the most recent fourteen days with the overall COVID-19 case history. Currently we analyze the countries of the world and the U.S. Counties. The purpose is to give policymakers, citizens, and analysts a fact-based data driven sense for the direction each place is currently going. When a place has the initial cases, they are assigned Emergent, and if that place controls the rate of new cases, they can move directly to Controlled, and even to End Stage in a short time. However, if the reporting or measures to curtail spread are not adequate and significant numbers of new cases continue, they are assigned to Spreading, and in cases where the spread is clearly uncontrolled, Epidemic trend.We analyze the data reported by Johns Hopkins University to produce the trends, and we report the rates of cases, spikes of new cases, the number of days since the last reported case, and number of deaths. We also make adjustments to the assignments based on population so rural areas are not assigned trends based solely on case rates, which can be quite high relative to local populations.Two key factors are not consistently known or available and should be taken into consideration with the assigned trend. First is the amount of resources, e.g., hospital beds, physicians, etc.that are currently available in each area. Second is the number of recoveries, which are often not tested or reported. On the latter, we provide a probable number of active cases based on CDC guidance for the typical duration of mild to severe cases.Reasons for undertaking this work in March of 2020:The popular online maps and dashboards show counts of confirmed cases, deaths, and recoveries by country or administrative sub-region. Comparing the counts of one country to another can only provide a basis for comparison during the initial stages of the outbreak when counts were low and the number of local outbreaks in each country was low. By late March 2020, countries with small populations were being left out of the mainstream news because it was not easy to recognize they had high per capita rates of cases (Switzerland, Luxembourg, Iceland, etc.). Additionally, comparing countries that have had confirmed COVID-19 cases for high numbers of days to countries where the outbreak occurred recently is also a poor basis for comparison.The graphs of confirmed cases and daily increases in cases were fit into a standard size rectangle, though the Y-axis for one country had a maximum value of 50, and for another country 100,000, which potentially misled people interpreting the slope of the curve. Such misleading circumstances affected comparing large population countries to small population counties or countries with low numbers of cases to China which had a large count of cases in the early part of the outbreak. These challenges for interpreting and comparing these graphs represent work each reader must do based on their experience and ability. Thus, we felt it would be a service to attempt to automate the thought process experts would use when visually analyzing these graphs, particularly the most recent tail of the graph, and provide readers with an a resulting synthesis to characterize the state of the pandemic in that country, state, or county.The lack of reliable data for confirmed recoveries and therefore active cases. Merely subtracting deaths from total cases to arrive at this figure progressively loses accuracy after two weeks. The reason is 81% of cases recover after experiencing mild symptoms in 10 to 14 days. Severe cases are 14% and last 15-30 days (based on average days with symptoms of 11 when admitted to hospital plus 12 days median stay, and plus of one week to include a full range of severely affected people who recover). Critical cases are 5% and last 31-56 days. Sources:U.S. CDC. April 3, 2020 Interim Clinical Guidance for Management of Patients with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19). Accessed online. Initial older guidance was also obtained online. Additionally, many people who recover may not be tested, and many who are, may not be tracked due to privacy laws. Thus, the formula used to compute an estimate of active cases is: Active Cases = 100% of new cases in past 14 days + 19% from past 15-25 days + 5% from past 26-49 days - total deaths. On 3/17/2022, the U.S. calculation was adjusted to: Active Cases = 100% of new cases in past 14 days + 6% from past 15-25 days + 3% from past 26-49 days - total deaths. Sources: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e4.htm https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#variant-proportions If a new variant arrives and appears to cause higher rates of serious cases, we will roll back this adjustment. We’ve never been inside a pandemic with the ability to learn of new cases as they are confirmed anywhere in the world. After reviewing epidemiological and pandemic scientific literature, three needs arose. We need to specify which portions of the pandemic lifecycle this map cover. The World Health Organization (WHO) specifies six phases. The source data for this map begins just after the beginning of Phase 5: human to human spread and encompasses Phase 6: pandemic phase. Phase six is only characterized in terms of pre- and post-peak. However, these two phases are after-the-fact analyses and cannot ascertained during the event. Instead, we describe (below) a series of five trends for Phase 6 of the COVID-19 pandemic.Choosing terms to describe the five trends was informed by the scientific literature, particularly the use of epidemic, which signifies uncontrolled spread. The five trends are: Emergent, Spreading, Epidemic, Controlled, and End Stage. Not every locale will experience all five, but all will experience at least three: emergent, controlled, and end stage.This layer presents the current trends for the COVID-19 pandemic by country (or appropriate level). There are five trends:Emergent: Early stages of outbreak. Spreading: Early stages and depending on an administrative area’s capacity, this may represent a manageable rate of spread. Epidemic: Uncontrolled spread. Controlled: Very low levels of new casesEnd Stage: No New cases These trends can be applied at several levels of administration: Local: Ex., City, District or County – a.k.a. Admin level 2State: Ex., State or Province – a.k.a. Admin level 1National: Country – a.k.a. Admin level 0Recommend that at least 100,000 persons be represented by a unit; granted this may not be possible, and then the case rate per 100,000 will become more important.Key Concepts and Basis for Methodology: 10 Total Cases minimum threshold: Empirically, there must be enough cases to constitute an outbreak. Ideally, this would be 5.0 per 100,000, but not every area has a population of 100,000 or more. Ten, or fewer, cases are also relatively less difficult to track and trace to sources. 21 Days of Cases minimum threshold: Empirically based on COVID-19 and would need to be adjusted for any other event. 21 days is also the minimum threshold for analyzing the “tail” of the new cases curve, providing seven cases as the basis for a likely trend (note that 21 days in the tail is preferred). This is the minimum needed to encompass the onset and duration of a normal case (5-7 days plus 10-14 days). Specifically, a median of 5.1 days incubation time, and 11.2 days for 97.5% of cases to incubate. This is also driven by pressure to understand trends and could easily be adjusted to 28 days. Source

This dataset contains model-based county-level estimates in GIS-friendly format. PLACES covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area levels. It provides information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at four geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. Project was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates are Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2021 or 2020 data, Census Bureau 2021 or 2020 county population estimates, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2017–2021 or 2016–2020 estimates. The 2023 release uses 2021 BRFSS data for 29 measures and 2020 BRFSS data for 7 measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleeping less than 7 hours) that the survey collects data on every other year. These data can be joined with the census 2020 county boundary file in a GIS system to produce maps for 36 measures at the county level. An ArcGIS Online feature service is also available for users to make maps online or to add data to desktop GIS software. https://cdcarcgis.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=2c3deb0c05a748b391ea8c9cf9903588

The CDC Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention's Data Trends & Maps online tool allows searching for and view of health indicators related to Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention on the basis of a specific location or a health indicator.

This dataset contains model-based census tract level estimates in GIS-friendly format. PLACES covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area levels. It provides information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at four geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates are Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2021 or 2020 data, Census Bureau 2010 population estimates, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2015–2019 estimates. The 2023 release uses 2021 BRFSS data for 29 measures and 2020 BRFSS data for 7 measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleeping less than 7 hours) that the survey collects data on every other year. These data can be joined with the census tract 2015 boundary file in a GIS system to produce maps for 36 measures at the census tract level. An ArcGIS Online feature service is also available for users to make maps online or to add data to desktop GIS software. https://cdcarcgis.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=2c3deb0c05a748b391ea8c9cf9903588

This dataset has been archived and will no longer be updated as of 10/16/2024. For updated data, please refer to the ILINet State Activity Indicator Map.

Information on outpatient visits to health care providers for respiratory illness referred to as influenza-like illness (ILI) is collected through the U.S. Outpatient Influenza-like Illness Surveillance Network (ILINet). ILINet consists of outpatient healthcare providers in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. More than 100 million patient visits were reported during the 2022-23 season. Each week, more than 3,000 outpatient health care providers around the country report to CDC the number of patient visits for ILI by age group (0-4 years, 5-24 years, 25-49 years, 50-64 years, and ≥65 years) and the total number of visits for any reason. A subset of providers also reports total visits by age group. For this system, ILI is defined as fever (temperature of 100°F [37.8°C] or greater) and a cough and/or a sore throat. Activity levels are based on the percent of outpatient visits due to ILI in a jurisdiction compared to the average percent of ILI visits that occur during weeks with little or no influenza virus circulation (non-influenza weeks) in that jurisdiction. The number of sites reporting each week is variable; therefore, baselines are adjusted each week based on which sites within each jurisdiction provide data. To perform this adjustment, provider level baseline ILI ratios are calculated for those that have a sufficient reporting history. Providers that do not have the required reporting history to calculate a provider-specific baseline are assigned the baseline ratio for their practice type. The jurisdiction level baseline is then calculated using a weighted sum of the baseline ratios for each contributing provider.

The activity levels compare the mean reported percent of visits due to ILI during the current week to the mean reported percent of visits due to ILI during non-influenza weeks. The 13 activity levels correspond to the number of standard deviations below, at, or above the mean for the current week compared with the mean during non-influenza weeks. Activity levels are classified as minimal (levels 1-3), low (levels 4-5), moderate (levels 6-7), high (levels 8-10), and very high (levels 11-13). An activity level of 1 corresponds to an ILI percentage below the mean, level 2 corresponds to an ILI percentage less than 1 standard deviation above the mean, level 3 corresponds to an ILI percentage more than 1 but less than 2 standard deviations above the mean, and so on, with an activity level of 10 corresponding to an ILI percentage 8 to 11 standard deviations above the mean. The very high levels correspond to an ILI percentage 12 to 15 standard deviations above the mean for level 11, 16 to 19 standard deviations above the mean for level 12, and 20 or more standard deviations above the mean for level 13.

Disclaimers:

The ILI Activity Indicator map reflects the intensity of ILI activity, not the extent of geographic spread of ILI, within a jurisdiction. Therefore, outbreaks occurring in a single area could cause the entire jurisdiction to display high or very high activity levels. In addition, data collected in ILINet may disproportionally represent certain populations within a jurisdiction, and therefore, may not accurately depict the full picture of respiratory illness activity for the entire jurisdiction. Differences in the data presented here by CDC and independently by some health departments likely represent differing levels of data completeness with data presented by the health department likely being more complete.

More information is available on FluView Interactive.

This dataset contains model-based county-level estimates for the PLACES 2021 release in GIS-friendly format. PLACES is the expansion of the original 500 Cities Project and covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia (DC)—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) levels. It represents a first-of-its kind effort to release information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at 4 geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. Project was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates include Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2019 or 2018 data, Census Bureau 2019 or 2018 county population estimates, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2015–2019 or 2014–2018 estimates. The 2021 release uses 2019 BRFSS data for 22 measures and 2018 BRFSS data for 7 measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleeping less than 7 hours a night). Seven measures are based on the 2018 BRFSS data because the relevant questions are only asked every other year in the BRFSS. These data can be joined with the census 2015 county boundary file in a GIS system to produce maps for 29 measures at the county level. An ArcGIS Online feature service is also available for users to make maps online or to add data to desktop GIS software. https://cdcarcgis.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=024cf3f6f59e49fe8c70e0e5410fe3cf

2014 to 2016, 3-year average. Rates are age-standardized. County rates are spatially smoothed. The data can be viewed by gender and race/ethnicity. Data source: National Vital Statistics System. Additional data, maps, and methodology can be viewed on the Interactive Atlas of Heart Disease and Stroke http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/maps/atlas

This dataset contains model-based ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) level estimates in GIS-friendly format. PLACES covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area levels. It provides information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at four geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates are Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2022 or 2021 data, Census Bureau 2020 population counts, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022 estimates. The 2024 release uses 2022 BRFSS data for 36 measures and 2021 BRFSS data for 4 measures (high blood pressure, high cholesterol, cholesterol screening, and taking medicine for high blood pressure control among those with high blood pressure) that the survey collects data on every other year. These data can be joined with the Census 2021 ZCTA boundary file in a GIS system to produce maps for 40 measures at the ZCTA level. An ArcGIS Online feature service is also available for users to make maps online or to add data to desktop GIS software. https://cdcarcgis.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=3b7221d4e47740cab9235b839fa55cd7

This point layer serves as a flag for known and previously reported locations of species of conservation concern in Yukon, as mapped by the Yukon Conservation Data Centre, when viewed at scales beyond 1:160,000. To view the actual mapped locations (polygons) see the Species of Conservation Concern layer, which becomes visible at 1:160,000. Distributed from GeoYukon by the Government of Yukon. Discover more digital map data and interactive maps from Yukon's digital map data collection. For more information: geomatics.help@yukon.ca

Note: This data was created by the Center for Disease Control, not the City of Rochester. This map is zoomed in to show the CDC data at the census tract level. You can zoom out to see data for all 500 cities. This map has been built to symbolize the percentage of adults who lacked health care coverage in 2017. However, if you click on a census tract, you can see statistics for the other public health statistics mentioned below in the "Overview of the Data" section.Overview of the Data: This service provides the 2019 release for the 500 Cities Project, based on data from 2017 or 2016 model-based small area estimates for 27 measures of chronic disease related to unhealthy behaviors (5), health outcomes (13), and use of preventive services (9). Twenty measures are based on 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) model estimates. Seven measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, Pap tests, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleep less than 7 hours) kept 2016 model estimates, since those questions are only asked in even years. The project was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. It represents a first-of-its kind effort to release information on a large scale for cities and for small areas within those cities. It includes estimates for the 500 largest US cities and approximately 28,000 census tracts within these cities. These estimates can be used to identify emerging health problems and to inform development and implementation of effective, targeted public health prevention activities. Because the small area model cannot detect effects due to local interventions, users are cautioned against using these estimates for program or policy evaluations.Data were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. Data sources used to generate these measures include BRFSS data (2017 or 2016), Census Bureau 2010 census population data, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2013-2017 or 2012-2016 estimates. For more information about the methodology, visit https://www.cdc.gov/500cities or contact 500Cities@cdc.gov.

This dataset contains ZCTA-level social determinants of health (SDOH) measures from the American Community Survey 5-year data for the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia. Data were downloaded from data.census.gov using Census API and processed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. The project was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. These measures complement existing PLACES measures, including PLACES SDOH measures (e.g., health insurance, routine check-up). These data can be used together with PLACES data to identify which health and SDOH issues overlap in a community to help inform public health planning. To access spatial data, please use the ArcGIS Online service: https://cdcarcgis.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=d51009ea78b54635be95c6ec9955ec17.

This dataset shows the known and previously reported location of rare plants and animals in Yukon Territory as mapped by the Yukon Conservation Data Centre. The Yukon Conservation Data Centre follows NatureServe methodology that depicts Element Occurrences (an area of land and/or water in which a species is or was present)(EO) as polygons. These polygons include locational uncertainty. The locational uncertainty incorporates inaccuracies that can be associated with the collection of location information, such as inaccurate GPSs or vague locational descriptions. Data are mapped at 1:50,000 or larger scale. A user manual describing the data can be found at https://mapservices.gov.yk.ca/geoyukon/Understanding_Yukon_Conservation_Data_Centre_Data.pdf . For detailed information about particular element occurrences, contact the Yukon Conservation Data Centre at yukoncdc@yukon.ca or 867-667-3684. It is very important to note that the absence of mapped locations in an area of interest does not necessarily mean that there are no species of conservation concern present; only that there are none currently recorded in the database. A detailed assessment of the site conducted during the appropriate season by qualified biologists is the only way to confirm presence or absence of a species of conservation concern. Distributed from GeoYukon by the Government of Yukon . Discover more digital map data and interactive maps from Yukon's digital map data collection. For more information: geomatics.help@yukon.ca

Note: This data was created by the Center for Disease Control, not the City of Rochester. This map is zoomed in to show the CDC data at the census tract level. You can zoom out to see data for all 500 cities in the data set. This map has been built to symbolize the percentage of adults in 2017 who smoke. However, if you click on a census tract, you can see statistics for the other public health statistics mentioned below in the "Overview of the Data" section.Overview of the Data: This service provides the 2019 release for the 500 Cities Project, based on data from 2017 or 2016 model-based small area estimates for 27 measures of chronic disease related to unhealthy behaviors (5), health outcomes (13), and use of preventive services (9). Twenty measures are based on 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) model estimates. Seven measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, Pap tests, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleep less than 7 hours) kept 2016 model estimates, since those questions are only asked in even years. The project was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. It represents a first-of-its kind effort to release information on a large scale for cities and for small areas within those cities. It includes estimates for the 500 largest US cities and approximately 28,000 census tracts within these cities. These estimates can be used to identify emerging health problems and to inform development and implementation of effective, targeted public health prevention activities. Because the small area model cannot detect effects due to local interventions, users are cautioned against using these estimates for program or policy evaluations.Data were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. Data sources used to generate these measures include BRFSS data (2017 or 2016), Census Bureau 2010 census population data, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2013-2017 or 2012-2016 estimates. For more information about the methodology, visit https://www.cdc.gov/500cities or contact 500Cities@cdc.gov.

2015 to 2017, 3-year average. Rates are age-standardized. County rates are spatially smoothed. The data can be viewed by sex and race/ethnicity. Data source: National Vital Statistics System. Additional data, maps, and methodology can be viewed on the Interactive Atlas of Heart Disease and Stroke. http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/maps/atlas